Rather interesting to note the differences between western perceptions and matters of historical accuracy. I've heard comments about similarities between the current brand of terrorists and the Japanese military before and they are astoundingly misguided. More discussion as to why this is so...

Suicide bombers; Japanese heroes

By MARK SCHILLING
The Japan Times

Everyone knows the word kamikaze -- the Western term for the pilots who flew bomb-loaded planes into American ships in the desperate closing days of World War II. In Japan, however, they were called the more respectful-sounding tokkotai (literally, "special-attack force") -- and they were not the only ones to go on suicide missions.

Based on a novel by Hideo Yokoyama, with a script by Yoji Yamada and Motofumi Tomikawa, Kiyoshi Sasabe's "Deguchi no Nai Umi (Sea Without Exit)" depicts the pilots of kaiten -- one-man submarines known by their enemies as "human torpedoes." Like the better-known tokkotai pilots, many of them were young, college-educated idealists who, in the normal course of events, would have gone on to lead normal lives, not to shout rightist slogans from the tops of sound trucks.

That said, they were willing to die for their country (and by association, emperor), and, as the film makes clear in one of its more memorable scenes, they were volunteers who knew what they were getting into. They may not have been born-and-bred warriors, but to many Japanese they are part of the great national tradition of heroes, from Minamoto no Yoshitsune to Saigo Takamori, who sacrificed all for hopeless causes, with an admirable purity of intent and deed. To these Japanese, as well as the surviving pilots themselves, Westerners who liken them to today's terrorists are not just historically wrong but disrespectful to the memory of the honorable (or sainted) fallen.

This makes a realistic portrayal of the kaiten pilots on film commercially difficult, if not impossible. Sasabe, a thoroughly mainstream director whose hits includes the 2004 courtroom drama "Hanochi," doesn't crudely affix halos, but he does give his four pilots unearthly glows, as though they exist in another, exalted realm beyond ordinary sinning humanity.

Does this mean "Deguchi" is some sort of rightist apology? A cinematic raising of the nisshoki? Yes and no -- just as the answer is "yes and no" for nearly all the local films I have seen about the tokkotai, as well as others in uniform who willingly made the supreme sacrifice in the Pacific War, including Seijiro Kouyama's "Gekko no Natsu" in 1993 (a tokkotai pilot plays Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata" for school children before flying off to his death), Yoko Narahashi's "Winds of God" in 1995 (a time-traveling comedian from the present day ends up volunteering for a tokkotai mission) and last year's "Otokotachi no Yamato" (sailors aboard the famed battleship Yamato knowing it is about to meet its doom). The dominant note is tragic (which is not the dominant note of, say, "Independence Day"), while the intent is to memorialize -- or glorify -- the fallen. In other words, film as park statuary.

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):who sacrificed all for hopeless causes, with an admirable purity of intent and deed. To these Japanese, as well as the surviving pilots themselves, Westerners who liken them to today's terrorists are not just historically wrong but disrespectful to the memory of the honorable (or sainted) fallen.

A) "admirable purity of deed" ? What is the purity in a deadly attack ?
B) "liken them to "..."disrespectful to.... honourable" ? What exactly is really "honourable" about such deadly self-sacrifice missions" ? And why should we be "respectful" ? And do the Japanese claim that THEIR self-sacrifice-attackers were "honourable" and full of "admirable purity of intent", and others who do similar things are not ?
-
There of course always are differences, no doubt. But clear and definite similarities as well. Those US sailors who died in Pearl Harbor were NOT on an attack mission on Dec 7 1941 but were practically as innocent as those people who died on Sep 11 2001. And the Japanese attackers acted on order of the government of the Empire of Japan, and were soldiers of a regular army.
-

The Japaneese only attacked military targets. There is a type of purity in that. Besides, what's the diference in taking yourself out in an attack on the enemy, and using a remotely piloted craft? Both ultimately use human guidance, the only diference (besides another loss of life) being the pilot using the remote could be considered a coward for not facing his enemy in person.

A) they were a regular army and NOT a guerilla army
B) look at the Total War as advocated by General William Tecumseh Sherman:
"" US Army General William Tecumseh Sherman's 'March to the Sea' during the American Civil War destroyed the resources required for the South to make war. He is considered one of the first military commanders to deliberately and consciously use total war as a military tactic. "" source: wikipedia
"" General William Tecumseh Sherman was one of the most zealous of all Union Generals, and believed firmly in punishing the south, and removing their will to fight by targeting civilian infrastructure. His methods of warfare later become known as the tactics of total war, or the belief that war isn't only against the troops on the battlefield, but also against the industries and transportation systems that supply them. He believed firmly in the justice and righteousness of a brutal wall, with the theory being the worse he could make it, the sooner it would be over. "" source: www.sonofthesouth.net
C) organisations like Hamas, Hizbullah and elQaeda firmly believe also Israeli civilians be a kind of "soldiers-in-disguise".

I guess you don't get the point as I see it. I see this as a discussion of warfare in the 40's where as you seem to want to take a modern tilt to this. Comparing a kamikaze to those scumbags who flew the planes into the WTC or any other modern suicide warrior is foolish. Once again my point being that the japs were going after military, and these modern morons just want to kill civilians just to kill civilians. I respect the japs for choosing to end their lives for military gain, but these radical theologists are norons.

Quoting TedTAce (Reply 4):Comparing a kamikaze to those scumbags who flew the planes into the WTC or any other modern suicide warrior is foolish.

comparing those ill-guided but high-spirited idealists who flew the planes into the WTC with those foolish kamikaze may be a problem in some ways, but nevertheless appropriate.
-
It is towards the end of the third paragraph, where the author in question quite clearly refers to self-sacrifice-attackers of today. THIS is what I refer to.

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):Rather interesting to note the differences between western perceptions and matters of historical accuracy. I've heard comments about similarities between the current brand of terrorists and the Japanese military before and they are astoundingly misguided. More discussion as to why this is so...

There is absolutely NO SIMILARITY between Japanese kamakazes and the current crop of suicide bombers. As far as I know, the kamakazes would only expend their lives attempting to hit military targets, most of the time being war ships. Secondly, they were not disguised to look like a harmless civilian to be able to sneak in close.

To me there a common element of the Kamikazi and the modern, Islamic, 'terrorist' suricide bomber - that is the religious support of such acts by those men (and women). One point that both believe that their acts are honorable to their faith and you would be rewarded with an beautiful afterlife in your act of suricide attacks.

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 6):Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
Rather interesting to note the differences between western perceptions and matters of historical accuracy. I've heard comments about similarities between the current brand of terrorists and the Japanese military before and they are astoundingly misguided. More discussion as to why this is so...

There is absolutely NO SIMILARITY between Japanese kamakazes and the current crop of suicide bombers. As far as I know, the kamakazes would only expend their lives attempting to hit military targets, most of the time being war ships. Secondly, they were not disguised to look like a harmless civilian to be able to sneak in close

Oh, yes, there is a big similarity:
The average age of a Kamikaze seaman or pilot was about 19. Their superiors, who DID NOT sacrifice themselves, but brainwashed them to get killed were usually much older, just like the current crop of suicide bombers.
There is an interesting book with interviews of Japanese people from the war, from the teenage factory girl to the convicted war criminal, from the army private to colonel, there they also interviewed some former members of the suicide units who were either not used when the war ended or somehow survived their attack (e.g. through a technical defect on their plane/boat)
It is called "Japan at War, an oral history".
I don't have it here at work now, but I can give you the author's names (an American-Japanese couple) and the ISBN number tomorrow.

"declared war" ? If you take note of the "Declaration of War Speech" of Franklin Delano Roosevelt on December 8, 1941, you will note that FDR mentioned that Japanese diplomats just the day before that attack had delivered new proposals for continued peace between the two countries, and that the attacks against the Hawaii Islands, Guam, Midway, Wake, the Philippine Islands and Malaya came absolutely without any declaration or warning. There in most places also were many civilian losses, beside the point that also the soldiers in place were absolutely unwarned.

Here some interesting parts out of the FDR speech :
-
***************************************************
-
Yesterday, December 7, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
--
The United States was at peace with that Nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its Government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American Island of Oahu, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack.
-
It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese Government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.
-
Yesterday the Japanese Government also launched an attack against Malaya.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam.
Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.
Last night the Japanese attacked Wake Island.
And this morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.
-
I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire.
-
******************************************************
-
While you emphasized the of course existing difference, the FDR speech, which apparently was never read by Messrs BinLadn, Zawahiri and MullahOmar, highlights some important aspects.
-
The COMMON thing in fact simply is that people go into death with full determination. The difference to some extent may be the target. The question in fact not really is the target, the question is the idea of such self-sacrifice missions.
-
The ideologists in question will always find an excuse to declare whatever target as a strategic one.
-

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 10):"declared war" ? If you take note of the "Declaration of War Speech" of Franklin Delano Roosevelt on December 8, 1941

The Japanese did not use any suicide weapons during the initial phases of the war. They were only used much later, when the war had quite clearly been declared and defined.

Besides, with the survival rate of Japanese pilots late in the war against superior American equipment and training, it was probably just as well to plan on crashing into something.

Any comparison between war time Japanese suicide soldiers and militant Islamic suicide terrorists is fleeting and only grounded in their determination and terminal method. The Japanese struck military targets, during an open conflict, were openly marked, and existed withing a formal military structure with chains of command and authority. Non of which can be said of suicide bombers.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 12):Are you reffering to the begining of the War or during the War.Im referring to the Latter.

you see what was the "beginning" of the War for the USA (Dec41) was the middle of the same thing in Europe where WW-II started in Sep-39 with the invasion of Belgium and France and the surrender of Marechal Petain. December 41 was the start of the "Pacific War". A war which was widely ignored by the "war generations" in Europe.
-
And you have to realize that, just to give an example, Egypt in these times had an economic boom as its cotton was in high demand for the war industry, and after 1946 plunged into an economic depression. Similar things all over the Maghreb. The vast US army which in early 1944 landed in Agadir and then went through Casablanca, Rabat, Tangiers, Oran, Algiers, Annnaba (Bone) and Tunis to Sicily and mainland-Italy with its enormous demand of food and other supplies brought about exceptionally big business for business owners throughout the Maghreb.
-

The US Sailors in Pearl Harbour were in the military, and therefore legitimate targets... Though Japan should have made the courtesy call saying they've declared war on the US to make the killings more "legitimate" under "generally accepted rule of war".

2a = Japanese employed military personnell to conduct suicide missions on military targets.
2b = terrorists used "irregular combatants" to conduct suicide missions on any target.

So, we have a difference.

Now we're onto the "motivation to commit suicide".
3a = Japanese government and the culture of the society used "the divine suicide to defend the emperor and the motherland"
3b = Terror groups use the "attack the infidels"
3c = Palestinians use both

Legally, I would think 3a is legal, 3c is semi-legal and need to be studied more to see whether each case falls into 3a or 3b. 3b is wrong because it is not an acceptable act in defence, but an act of offence. Being on the offensive means you have a bigger obligation to honour the "generally accepted rule of war"... But then, these terrorists probably wanna use every single prohibition clause on the "generally accepted rule of war".

And, despite my gross differences with Cfalk on other topics, I agree with him on this one with reservations in that, the similarities that may exist are limited to the use of 'divine' actions and the loss of the attacker's life. The rest has no similarities.

The similarities that do exist apart from the conduct of the attack itself, is in the "indoctrination process".

ME AVN FAN,
There is a difference however, as I hope I've implied above, that to commit a self sacrifice mission in defence of one's country or your fellow men is different than a self sacrifice mission to attack and scare a civilian population.

But yes, the ideologists will always find an excuse...

However, the Japanese did not use suicide missions unless they are desperate/vergin on loosing/defending their homeland (and their 'expanded' homeland)... Which meant that, most of them were used towards the end of the war. Other times when they made a self sacrifice mission is only when it is to save lives (ie: allowing your friends to retreat while you kill yourself defending or diverting their attention... but then, you don't need to be in the Japanese Imperial Military to do that, MANY with a level of camraderie as soldiers would do it, regardless of nationality, race or religion).

Sometimes the difference between heroism and terrorism can be a bit thin...

Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 18):There is a difference however, as I hope I've implied above, that to commit a self sacrifice mission in defence of one's country or your fellow men is different than a self sacrifice mission to attack and scare a civilian population.

But yes, the ideologists will always find an excuse...

there of course ARE differences. But communalities include :
> ill-guided idealism
> extreme ideologies of those in command / in the background
> total dis-regard for all alternative considerations
-

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 20):Is it true that there was a Japanese Soldier still in Hiding Decades after the WW2 had ended as he was not aware.
regdsMEL

Yes,

In 1944, Lt. Hiroo Onoda was sent by the Japanese army to the remote Philippine island of Lubang. His mission was to conduct guerrilla warfare during World War II. Unfortunately, he was never officially told the war had ended; so for 29 years, Onoda continued to live in the jungle, ready for when his country would again need his services and information. Eating coconuts and bananas and deftly evading searching parties he believed were enemy scouts, Onoda hid in the jungle until he finally emerged from the dark recesses of the island on March 19, 1972.